Home › Forums › Help and Support › Very poor dark color performance
- This topic has 11 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 4 months ago by Mika.
-
AuthorPosts
-
2017-11-11 at 13:27 #9438
I have used Spyder Elite many years from now, but I have heard so many recommendation about DisplayCAL so I give it a chance. My instrument is Spyder 5.
I’m photo- and videographer. I mainly use Lightroom, Photoshop and Vegas Pro. Mostly web publish, but also some prints. I’m used to 120cdm2, D65 and 2.2 Gamma settings.
Now my problem is with DisplayCAL that dark colors, dark grays and blacks are very off. Monitor is Eizo EV2736W which should have Delta E Maximum of 0,5.
I attached my settings and report. What might be wrong and is those best possible settings for me?
Thanks for all possible help!
- This topic was modified 6 years, 4 months ago by Mika.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.2017-11-11 at 13:55 #9444Hi,
some of the settings you used are not recommended. Low calibration speed is generally only a good idea for fast instruments, the Spyders do not fall into that category. Also, a high profiling patch count isn’t suitable for the same reason as well as the chosen profile type (matrix profiles only require a few dozen patches, more patches will not lead to more accuracy and are essentially wasted time). My advice is to use the defaults or “Office & Web” preset.
Also, be sure to disable any auto-dimming (energy saving) features on the monitor.
2017-11-11 at 14:31 #9447Thanks Florian for your answer.
Is XYZ LUT + matrix recommended profile type with auto-optimized testchart? I have read that some programs have problem with LUT profiles and recommend to use single curve. Can you enlighten me about this?
2017-11-11 at 14:50 #9448With XYZ LUT + matrix, you get the best of both worlds. Proper color managed programs (e.g. Photoshop, most programs that use littleCMS) will use the cLUT, others will use the shaper+matrix tags.
2017-11-11 at 17:39 #9456Ok. For Profile types I think reason was that between color managed and non-color managed programs have then diffentent looks. I now selected XYZ LUT + matrix with auto-optimized testchart.
I have reset monitor to factory state, eco settings are off, only modified brightness and color gain. Settings are:
Brigtness 27,5
Contrast 50
Tempature Off
Gamma 2.2
Overdrive Off
Red Gain 100
Green Gain 99
Blue Gain 97
Eco Timer Off
Auto EcoView Off
EcoView Sense OffI now did calibration with Office & Web preset and dark colors are much better, but still below 10% colors are way off. I even lowered white level to 100cdm2.
With TFT Central test this monitor get these values:
Luminance (cd/m2) 120
Black Point (cd/m2) 0.12
Contrast Ratio 974:1
Delta E Average 0.3
Delta E Maximum 0.5And I got:
Luminance (cd/m2) 100
Black Point (cd/m2) 0.14
Contrast Ratio 712:1
Delta E Average 0.4
Delta E Maximum 5.3Report attached.
Is there something what I can try?
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.2017-11-11 at 17:55 #9458For Profile types I think reason was that between color managed and non-color managed programs have then diffentent looks.
Non-color managed programs will never show the same result as color managed, the profile type has no influence on this.
I now did calibration with Office & Web preset and dark colors are much better, but still below 10% colors are way off. I even lowered white level to 100cdm2.
That’s fine though, your monitor has simply a somewhat greenish blackpoint. If you want the calibration to correct this (at the expense of contrast), enable advanced options and increase black point correction (or set it to automatic) on the calibration tab.
With TFT Central test this monitor get these values
Always take these with a grain of salt as any results are specific to the single monitor they tested. Delta E isn’t even comparable unless you use the exact same verification chart (and delta E formula).
- This reply was modified 6 years, 4 months ago by Florian Höch.
2017-11-11 at 20:49 #9466I see.
I recalibrated screen with suggested settings and Auto Black point correction.
Settings and report attached. What do you think? At least I can see between uncalibrated and calibrated much less greenish tone in dark colors.
How can I test can I push black point correction even further?
Thank you!
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.2017-11-12 at 17:48 #94762017-11-13 at 10:37 #9484And with 100% correction.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.2017-11-15 at 20:06 #9528I did calibration with all selected “As measured” but Tone curve which I select Gamma 2.2. I also select Automatic Black point correction with 3.5 Rate. Verification in attachments. Which might be the best calibration, and why?
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.2017-11-16 at 0:32 #9541Not much difference between them. Personally I would opt for higher contrast over corrected black point.
2017-11-16 at 9:27 #9548Ok. Thanks for answer. I think I stick with last calibration then.
But there are actualy differences between calibrations when changing between them. Some are more reddish and some more greenish.
-
AuthorPosts